Script Shadow in the NY Times!

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

    The biggest copyright problem the entertainment industry faces right now is that none of you guys are paying for porn, you're all viewing it for free on the internet. Those performers are exerting themselves, some might say degrading themselves, to make a living. So next time you're thinking of heading over to red tube dot come, have another think about what you're doing.
    It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

    Comment


    • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

      Originally posted by ATB View Post
      Everyone gets hurt... 'cept Eads.
      Eads? No, we're talking about Reeves, Carson Reeves.
      Last edited by Jules; 12-04-2012, 01:31 PM.
      It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

      Comment


      • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

        Originally posted by Manchester View Post
        OK, you seem to have misread me. I'm not casting aspersions - and so, I didn't use "club" in the pejorative sense. I was simply providing an analysis, and I stand by it.

        As for free ice cream being a benefit of working for an ice cream company - as you say - yeh, sure. But that's an employer-provided benefit, not an industry benefit. IWO, if I worked for Cox Cable, I dunno that I'd get free Comcast Cable - which is a better fit in the analogy department.

        In any event, starting from Michael's assertion - my point was that it's not a permission-based system; it's a club-membership-based system. That is, many, many people in the industry who read current scripts do not have permission to read them - but that's OK because they are in the industry.

        And to reiterate, I'm not casting aspersions; just providing an analysis.
        _________
        Addendum -

        In some ways, it's not all that complicated. But, I agree with you that it makes sense.
        You're right, I did misread you - my apologies. I just find that the term "club" often has a four-letter-word-type meaning (even though it is a four-letter word...I mean, you know what I mean) in this kind of discussion.

        And I think we could get to the point where we'd split hairs on this, so let me just say that, for the most part, I agree with you.

        Comment


        • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

          Originally posted by Jules View Post
          The biggest copyright problem the entertainment industry faces right now is that none of you guys are paying for porn, you're all viewing it for free on the internet. Those performers are exerting themselves, some might say degrading themselves, to make a living. So next time you're thinking of heading over to red tube dot come, have another think about what you're doing.
          I might be the only person on the planet who pays for porn. And I'm OK with that. It's constant and its consistent and it's wonderful.

          Comment


          • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

            That's impressive.
            It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

            Comment


            • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

              Originally posted by Steven L. View Post
              1. Become a professional screenwriter.

              2. Ask your reps, "I'd like to read _____. Can you send it?".


              Outside of that circle, read the **** that's already online. IMSDB or whatever.
              How did they get it? And why is it OK for them to send it to you (or the professional writer) and not other people?

              Or is there a law that says only pro's can read this.

              It's either everybody or nobody (except the people working on it or people that might work on it).

              Comment


              • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                If you're reading someone else's work, something they no doubt worked very hard on, be respectful, be grateful, because it's not your entitlement.

                Those are my closing sentiments.
                It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

                Comment


                • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                  Anyway, we've gone on a huge tangent; congratulations Emily for getting your name in the New York Times!
                  It's the eye of the Tiger, it's the thrill of the fight

                  Comment


                  • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                    Originally posted by goosetown View Post
                    it's often your JOB to read as many scripts as you can get your hands on, and it's your JOB to network with other interns and assistants to know what's out there.
                    What if I want writing screenplays to be my JOB? I don't beat my head against my computer, ignore my children, and grind out hundreds of pages of courier because I'm a hobbyist having a jolly time!

                    For me it's my JOB.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                      Originally posted by goosetown View Post
                      You're right, I did misread you - my apologies. I just find that the term "club" often has a four-letter-word-type meaning (even though it is a four-letter word...I mean, you know what I mean) in this kind of discussion.

                      And I think we could get to the point where we'd split hairs on this, so let me just say that, for the most part, I agree with you.
                      That is, I mean - likewise. And thanks.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                        Originally posted by goosetown View Post
                        If I can jump in here for a second - I know exactly where you're going with this, and it's a perfectly reasonable conclusion. However, you're thinking about it in the wrong context.

                        You, as many others have before, see this as an issue of membership in a "club" (using the word in the pejorative sense). Again, I understand how you get there, and the industry CERTAINLY can function as such. And does in many respects. However, here, this is not what John and Michael are saying, and that's not how it works.

                        When you're an intern or an assistant, it's often your JOB to read as many scripts as you can get your hands on, and it's your JOB to network with other interns and assistants to know what's out there. Why? Because when you're done being an intern or assistant at one place, you could work literally anywhere else in the industry. It's one big, incestual proving ground.

                        Think about it this way, too: if you work for a management company or agency, you need to read scripts because your clients might be appearing in any given project. If you work at a studio or production company, you might want to hire a writer for a project and you might need a sample of his/her writing. Who are the first ones to read these projects and write coverage? Interns and assistants. And who shares this coverage to streamline the process for their fellow grunts? The same. Sh*t gets busy.

                        It's also a perk of employment. If you work for a cable company, sometimes you get free cable. If you work in an ice cream stand, you get free ice cream. Are those who work in these industries part of a "club"? No. They're employees, and as employees, they get certain benefits. Hollywood is no different in this regard.

                        For DECADES, scripts leaked out of the system and into the hands of "civilian" readers, and the studios turned a blind eye to that. It was, for all intents and purposes, expected; writers are resourceful, writers want to learn, and they're going to get their hands on stuff. Hell, there were multiple sites hosting hundreds or thousands of scripts in multiple stages of development for produced films. Did the industry turn a blind eye to those? They sure did.

                        And then, ironically enough, SS started not only reviewing but POSTING FOR DOWNLOAD in-development scripts. And then the studios started cracking down, not only on in-development stuff, but on the long-released fare as well. Because, like it or not, there's a difference between a small network of wannabe writers passing a few scripts back and forth amongst themselves and people on the Internet offering a downloadable file to anyone with an IP address.

                        Like most other things, it's complicated, but it also makes sense.
                        Another point to note is that, generally, when people inside the industry are passing around a script and reading it "without the permission of the writer" (just like Carson!) it is something that may well benefit the writer.

                        Because, people don't spend time passing around, recommending, and reading scripts on referral when the script is bad. No one has time for that. They are doing it because the script is good and/or because their company may have an interest in the script.

                        This often leads to wonderful things, like, a sale. Or, someone reading a script and then wanting to meet with the writer, that sort of thing.

                        When someone reviews a script and makes that script available for consumption, they are doing it not because they have an interest in the property, they are doing it because they have an audience. An audience that they must engage and entertain, one way or another, glowing review, or rip something to shreds. So, in this case, BAD things can happen for the writer.

                        I think it is undeniably clear that the "passing around of scripts" which happens all day every day inside the business can be a very good thing for the writers of those scripts, with minimal downside, whereas what Chris is doing has obviously negative potential.

                        Of course, this is only relevant for people who give a **** about the writers of these scripts.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                          Originally posted by Howie428 View Post
                          What if I want writing screenplays to be my JOB? I don't beat my head against my computer, ignore my children, and grind out hundreds of pages of courier because I'm a hobbyist having a jolly time!

                          For me it's my JOB.
                          Well, obviously, wanting to write screenplays professionally and actually *doing* that are two incredibly different things. That's in no way meant to minimize your effort - it's just a fact of the matter.

                          Until you get paid, it's not a job - it's an activity. Or a hobby. Or an interest. Or a passion. Or whatever you want to call it.

                          Now, that mind: you have access to these scripts if you know the right people to ask.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                            Originally posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
                            Another point to note is that, generally, when people inside the industry are passing around a script and reading it "without the permission of the writer" (just like Carson!) it is something that may well benefit the writer.

                            Because, people don't spend time passing around, recommending, and reading scripts on referral when the script is bad. No one has time for that. They are doing it because the script is good and/or because their company may have an interest in the script.

                            This often leads to wonderful things, like, a sale. Or, someone reading a script and then wanting to meet with the writer, that sort of thing.

                            When someone reviews a script and makes that script available for consumption, they are doing it not because they have an interest in the property, they are doing it because they have an audience. An audience that they must engage and entertain, one way or another, glowing review, or rip something to shreds. So, in this case, BAD things can happen for the writer.

                            I think it is undeniably clear that the "passing around of scripts" which happens all day every day inside the business can be a very good thing for the writers of those scripts, with minimal downside, whereas what Chris is doing has obviously negative potential.

                            Of course, this is only relevant for people who give a **** about the writers of these scripts.
                            Aside from a misplaced comma, I agree with everything else in this post.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                              Originally posted by goosetown View Post
                              you have access to these scripts if you know the right people to ask.
                              Yes, ScriptShadow...

                              Comment


                              • Re: Script Shadow in the NY Times!

                                There are a lot of separate issues within this bigger ScriptShadow issue we could discuss, and they have all been discussed.

                                To me, the bottom line is, whatever "harm" Carson may be doing, it's minimal, and not worth all this angst.

                                The biggest harm he's doing is to himself.

                                "Trust your stuff." -- Dave Righetti, Pitching Coach

                                ( Formerly "stvnlra" )

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X